Motor vehicle tariff classification depends on actual seating capacity and registered design, not the chassis invoice description.

Body-built motor cabs manufactured on duty-paid chassis were treated as manufactured goods, and tariff classification turned on the vehicle's actual designed and registered seating capacity rather than the chassis manufacturer's invoice description. The specific heading for motor vehicles designed to carry more than six but not more than twelve persons, excluding the driver, was applied where the finished vehicle answered that description, leaving the residuary heading inapplicable. For tariff purposes, the substantive characteristics of the completed vehicle and its registration particulars prevailed over the invoice classification used for the chassis.

---

---

Issues: Whether motor cabs/body-built vehicles with seating capacity of 12 plus 1 were classifiable under Sub-Heading 8702.10 or under Sub-Heading 8702.90, and whether NCCD was payable on the goods manufactured by the body builder.

Analysis: Body building on duty-paid chassis amounted to manufacture. For tariff classification, the relevant consideration was the actual seating capacity for which the vehicle was built and registered, not merely the classification adopted by the chassis manufacturer in its invoice. Sub-Heading 8702.10 covered motor vehicles designed for transport of more than six persons but not more than twelve persons, excluding the driver, while Sub-Heading 8702.90 was residuary. The Court treated the seating capacity as a finding of fact and held that the respondent's vehicles fell within the specific entry. The job cards and chassis invoice could not override the substantive classification indicated by the vehicle's actual characteristics and registration particulars.

Conclusion: The vehicles were classifiable under Sub-Heading 8702.10 and NCCD was not payable under the basis urged by the Revenue; the respondent's stand was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The demand was unsustainable and the appeal succeeded, resulting in restoration of the Revenue's classification approach being rejected by the Tribunal.

Ratio Decidendi: For tariff purposes, classification of a body-built motor vehicle turns on its actual designed and registered seating capacity, and not on the chassis manufacturer's invoice classification where the body builder's finished product answers a specific tariff entry.

---